GUCCC Town Class Names

[alan_fincher]

Belfast I struggle with, why the heck would the GUCCC have been trading with Belfast, and equally, no one station is called Belfast (go on, argue, but as far as I remember no Belfast station actually has the word "Belfast" in its name)

I know I'm claiming "possible exception", so Richard will get "cross" with me, but I often wondered if that apparently odd choice of a Northern Ireland location is because Harland and Wolff were chosen to build a very large part of the GUCCCo fleet.

 

OK, I know they weren't built in Belfast, but that of course is where the main yards for H&W were.

 

As an aside - My family put in a very speculative tender bid on Belfast, when she ended up as one of the repossessed boats dumped derelict by BW on the Wendover Arm in the early 1970s. We were unsuccessful, of course!

 

100 posts and nothing proven

No, but it has caused me to rethink my position on the whole topic, and it is keeping me away from some things I really don't want to have to be doing!

[Keeping Up]

As an aside - My family put in a very speculative tender bid on Belfast, when she ended up as one of the repossessed boats dumped derelict by BW on the Wendover Arm in the early 1970s. We were unsuccessful, of course!

 

Which is why it is now moored just to the west of Tower Bridge

[Tuscan]

It's a interesting thread if only to show that when so much is known about the formation and subsequent history of the canals , much is still missing. It has really whetted my appetite to find out the answer.

[Chertsey]

This is, in fact exactly my point. I can put forward a logical argument for the names, that cannot be proved or disproved. I'm afraid it has no more or less value than the 'picking names at random from Bradshaw' theory which equally cannot be proved or disproved

 

So, nothing has changed.

 

Richard

It's not about proved or disproved, its about more likely or less likely.

Those of us who are actually interested in the topic itself seem to have found it a helpful discussion, anyway.

[RLWP]

I know I'm claiming "possible exception", so Richard will get "cross" with me, but I often wondered if that apparently odd choice of a Northern Ireland location is because Harland and Wolff were chosen to build a very large part of the GUCCCo fleet.

 

 

 

Why is arguing an opposing view 'getting cross'?

 

I happen to think that that is exactly why Belfast was chosen

 

Richard

[alan_fincher]

Why is arguing an opposing view 'getting cross'?

I did put "cross" in quotes, of course - perhaps I should have backed it up with an appropriate smiley!

[alan_fincher]

That consideration occurred to me early in this discussion, but when I tried to think of some, the only place of any significance I could think of was St Davids, but it was little more than a village, and not a city in 1936. I certainly could not think of any sizeable places in Wiltshire that did not have a railway station when the boats were built.

 

I don't know Wiltshire, so I'll probably disgrace myself if I try with that county!

 

This site shows a list of Wiltshire towns and villages, and the only one I can't immediately find a railway station for (ever) is Mere

 

Not huge, I'll admit, but a population of around 2000 back then certainly makes it a lot bigger than some places chosen at the time.

 

Going wider than Wiltshire, though, I can't immediately think how you would answer the question "what was the biggest town in the UK in 1936 that didn't have a railway station named after it"!

 

Ideas, anybody ?

 

EDIT: I guess the biggest place with no railway station named after it was probably "London"

[Derek R.]

London Bridge?

[alan_fincher]

London Bridge?

Damn! - Should have checked!

[David Mack]

How interesting. Why don't they take away from the Bradshaw theory - they aren't in Bradshaw

 

Richard

 

Indeed Glossor and Bilster aren't in Bradshaw, but as far as I know (from the first few pages of Google searches) they aren't in any other list which could conceivably have been used as a source for the Town Class names, be that a road atlas, a rail map, a trade directory, a list of ultimate destinations for goods carried on the canal, the places of birth of GUCCCo shareholders, or any thing else I can think of.

 

Glossor doesn't seem to be a place at all, and the only reference I can find to Bilster as a place is the Bilster-Berg Drive Resort in Germany.

 

So I am forced to conclude either that Glossor and Bilster are not named after places at all, or that these boat names are erroneous transcriptions of other words that are most likely (but not definitely) place names. Others have suggested that they may be incorrect renderings of Glossop and Bilston, both of which happen to be names of towns with railway stations, but both could equally be place names on a road atlas, in a trade directory etc.

 

Hence my observation that these particular 'misspellings' neither add to nor take away from the 'Bradshaw theory'.

 

 

My own view is that it is a reasonable proposition (nothing more) that the 'Town Class' names could have been taken from Bradshaw or a similar railway-related source, since all of the names (those which can be identified as places) can be found there, whereas some (such as Angel and Aldgate) are unlikely to be listed as place names in other potential sources, and Bradshaw would have been a readily available list of place names covering the whole country at the time these names were chosen.

 

Given the likely level of literacy amongst boat painters at the time it wouldn't surprise me if some transcription and spelling errors occured. Who remembers the "Brititish Rail" sign which adorned Bedford Station for some time in the 80's when signwriters' literacy should have been much higher?

 

And once the boats were painted with their names (presumably by the yards that built them), then I can see that the GUCCCo might have used the as-painted names for their subsequent records.

 

Until someone can come up with relevant GUCCCo papers from the time, there is no evidence that I have seen which says the Bradshaw theory can't be correct.

 

I guess the biggest place with no railway station named after it was probably "London"

 

And all the GUCCCo boats would have had "London" painted on them!

 

(in the company address)

[RLWP]

<snip>

 

EDIT: I guess the biggest place with no railway station named after it was probably "London"

 

Birmingham

 

Richard

[Lazyletters]

The following is from Waterways World of May 1989:

Grand Union Names

Between 1934 and 1938, the Grand Union Canal Carrying Company commissioned 348 new narrowboats. These were split into two classes: 16 in the Star Class, and 172 in the Town Class.

Names for the Star Class are drawn from stars, constellations, planets and other astronomy terms. Either these names were chosen by a keen astronomer, or simply selected from the index of a book on the subject.

Town Class names appear a strange mixture of towns and villages, and I have a theory that they should be known as Railway Station Class. A particular pointer is the first boat in the list of butties: Angel, a station on what is now the Northern Line of the London Underground.

Using as my reference the British Railways Pre-Grouping Atlas and Gazateer published by Ian Allan, virtually all of the Town Class names are found to be railway stations. Of the 172, those that aren’t easily included and other curiosities are detailed below.

i) Three of the names only appear as secondary parts of the station name.

Badsey, as Littleton and Badsey

Tarporley, as Beeston Castle and Tarporley

Rawdon, as Apperly Bridge and Rawdon

ii) A group of three ‘bournes’ use a common spelling.

Cambourne should be Camborne

Lambourne should be Lambourn

Fulbourne should be Fulbourn, but is in fact spelt Fulbourne in the Gazateer.

iii) Belfast – not covered by the Gazateer of British Railways, but obviously a station. Perhaps there is a connection with the builders of the boat, Harland & Wolff of Woolwich, whose other more famous yard is in Belfast, but then why not a boat named Woolwich, or Northwich, or Rickmansworth, where the boats were also built?

iv) Glossor – a misspelling of Glossop?

v) Bilster – unknown, perhaps a mis-spelling of Bilston. There are several examples of bad spelling in the Star Class, notably Triagullum and Glaxy, so this is quite possible.

Acknowledgements to Alan Faulkner for the list of boats in his book, The George and The Mary.

Are there any comments on these thoughts, or any first hand knowledge?

Martin Haigh, London

Editor’s note:

The News Editor suggests that Bradshaw’s Railway Guide would have been readily available as a source of inspiration in any office in the days when all business travel was by rail. Alan Faulkner comments:

I would have suggested the Post Office Guide; it could, however, have been something like Bradshaw’s Railway Guide. Whatever source it was, the selection process was not as straightforward as might appear. It was important to try and select names not already in use by other carriers. Fellows Morton & Clayton had a large Town Class of its own. It had a Belfast too, but she had been sold before the GUCCC came along. FMC tended to go more for canal towns and places but most of them have railway stations as well. The derivation of the names is all rather academic and I doubt if we shall ever know the real answer. I must say, though, that the thought of a Railway Station Class, as Martin suggests, sends shudders up my spine. It was bad enough when British Waterways had their station boats in the 1950s. At least they had the excuse that these boats all came from the LMS Railway originally.

[David Mack]

Birmingham

 

Richard

 

Birmingham Snow Hill was known as "Birmingham" from 1852 to 1858.

[Derek R.]

Damn! - Should have checked!

 

No - I cheated - it is suffixed with Bridge.

 

There's a huge list of Stations closed in 1936 here, you would be hard pushed to use up all the available names for certain - and that list does not include the open ones.

And here's Aber!

 

Welcome Lazyletters (?) must be a story behind that, and thanks for the inclusion of the WW piece.

 

So no definitive allocation as to name source. No matter, the probabilities remain - Stations, and likely from a published list.

Edited July 6, 2012 by Derek R.

[David Mack]

but then why not a boat named Woolwich, or Northwich, or Rickmansworth, where the boats were also built?

 

Because "Woolwich" would have been a Northwich?

[NB Alnwick]

 

>snip<

 

Belfast I struggle with, why the heck would the GUCCC have been trading with Belfast, and equally, no one station is called Belfast (go on, argue, but as far as I remember no Belfast station actually has the word "Belfast" in its name)

 

Not edited, but I believe Belfast Central carries the city name, but it opened in the 1970's long after the town class.

 

I think much of the 'evidence' that has been quoted here still points to the idea that I mooted earlier - rather than taking names out of the Bradshaw index, the names were most probably taken from a contemporary London, Midland & Scottish Railway (LMS) publication that listed freight and parcels facilities. This would have listed many destinations on other companies lines (especially if the LMS had a Goods or Parcels Agent there) and that is why I put forward the theory that rather than being named after passenger stations, these boats took the names of LMS goods or parcels destinations - which were often but not always the same as passenger stations. This also explains the use of Belfast - the LMS was the only major pre-Nationalization railway company to operate in Northern Ireland and it had extensive freight and parcels facilities in Belfast.

[madcat]

Map, pin, maybe. Halsall had a railway station,OS map shews dismantled railway going past.

[NB Alnwick]

 

>snip<

 

And here's Aber!

 

>snip<

 

You beat me to it! Aber was another LMS freight and parcels facility that had much greater importance in the 1930s than it does today - also, as far as I can ascertain, the LMS was the only organisation to publish the name as Aber - everywhere else it was 'Abergwyngregyn' . . .

 

Edited to add: Aber had freight facilities far bigger than its rural location might have suggested with cattle pens and a siding for loading slate from the adjacent slate works. I have a photograph in my collection of a goods train being shunted at Aber just after the Second World War.

Edited July 6, 2012 by NB Alnwick

[Laurence Hogg]

The placing of this massive order for boats attracted National attention because it was and probably still is the greatest number of marine craft ordered at one time by one company. The minutes of the GUCCCo Ltd probably still exist in the BW archive ("The black hole"), contemporary magazines of the time ie "Motor Boat" reviewed the new boats, somewhere in that lot should be the answer to how the names came to be. Whilst sympathising with the railway idea one ought to remember the GUCCCo Ltd was FIGHTING railway competition along with the GUCCo which was modernising its routes. No where on any of the drawings I have (and there are more than published in my sales lists)is there any reference to naming or classes. Most of the first drawings published carried a "B" prefix and are known to historians as the "B" series, these however become redrawn some totally some partly, even then the letter prefixes are rare to see, but yard numbers creep in on some sheets from H&W.

 

The 1989 article itself assumes FMC had a town class, once again sheer assumption, FMC graded their craft in their records by horsepower, there is no "Fish" class etc mentioned.

 

I was told a long time back that the town & village names were associated with directors and their families, if that was the case then using my own immediate family names I could pull up around 12 or so associated with our lot!

[Tuscan]

The placing of this massive order for boats attracted National attention because it was and probably still is the greatest number of marine craft ordered at one time by one company. The minutes of the GUCCCo Ltd probably still exist in the BW archive ("The black hole"), contemporary magazines of the time ie "Motor Boat" reviewed the new boats, somewhere in that lot should be the answer to how the names came to be. Whilst sympathising with the railway idea one ought to remember the GUCCCo Ltd was FIGHTING railway competition along with the GUCCo which was modernising its routes. No where on any of the drawings I have (and there are more than published in my sales lists)is there any reference to naming or classes. Most of the first drawings published carried a "B" prefix and are known to historians as the "B" series, these however become redrawn some totally some partly, even then the letter prefixes are rare to see, but yard numbers creep in on some sheets from H&W.

 

The 1989 article itself assumes FMC had a town class, once again sheer assumption, FMC graded their craft in their records by horsepower, there is no "Fish" class etc mentioned.

 

I was told a long time back that the town & village names were associated with directors and their families, if that was the case then using my own immediate family names I could pull up around 12 or so associated with our lot!

 

 

 

 

I agree especially as per my previous posts I struggle to believe when GUCC were battling against the railways there principal competitor they would name their largest order of new boats after rail depots/stations. Can you imagine BA naming their new planes after Ryan Air flight destinations.

[NB Alnwick]

I agree especially as per my previous posts I struggle to believe when GUCC were battling against the railways there principal competitor they would name their largest order of new boats after rail depots/stations. Can you imagine BA naming their new planes after Ryan Air flight destinations.

 

By the 1930s any serious competition between the railways and the canals was negligible. Certainly, the railways no longer saw the canals as serious competition so the comparison with two of today's major airlines is irrelevant. The 1938 'Square Deal' campaign which united the 'Big Four' railway companies was aimed entirely a persuading the government to allow them to compete fairly with road transport a threat that had been growing since the end of the First World War - at the time road hauliers and bus companies were unfettered by the burden of regulation that railways had to endure. In general, canal carrying companies stood together with the railways on the 'Square Deal' campaign because they also feared the threat of unregulated and unfair competition from road transport.

 

I imagine that very few of us can really imagine just how important the railways had become before the advent of the Second World War - the influence of railway transport was everywhere and, at this time, even the canal companies would have used the railways when they needed something quickly or from a place not conveniently served by canal. The railways also owned and managed a large proportion of the canal network - as well as owning many of the warehouses and loading facilities beside the canals.

[Tuscan]

By the 1930s any serious competition between the railways and the canals was negligible. Certainly, the railways no longer saw the canals as serious competition so the comparison with two of today's major airlines is irrelevant. The 1938 'Square Deal' campaign which united the 'Big Four' railway companies was aimed entirely a persuading the government to allow them to compete fairly with road transport a threat that had been growing since the end of the First World War - at the time road hauliers and bus companies were unfettered by the burden of regulation that railways had to endure. In general, canal carrying companies stood together with the railways on the 'Square Deal' campaign because they also feared the threat of unregulated and unfair competition from road transport.

 

I imagine that very few of us can really imagine just how important the railways had become before the advent of the Second World War - the influence of railway transport was everywhere and, at this time, even the canal companies would have used the railways when they needed something quickly or from a place not conveniently served by canal. The railways also owned and managed a large proportion of the canal network - as well as owning many of the warehouses and loading facilities beside the canals.

 

 

 

 

 

Makes you wonder what possessed them to make such a large order of freight carrying boats if as you state the railways had by then monopolised the shipment of goods. I think in hindsight you are exactly right but don't believe this was the case when this orders were being planned 1934? Well before the square deal campaign. I am sure the writing was on the wall and this was probably a last fling at trying to promote the canals through amalgamation and modernising the fleet, this still doesn't tell me why they would opt for rail related names (still key competitors) as opposed say to names where individual managers were born or other random connections around place names.

[Derek R.]

Hindsight. Its benefit is a dubious element, for who today can determine what we do today will benefit us or anyone else in the future to our best abilities? We try of course, but perhaps those folk in the 1930s were also trying - to create something against the odds. There are failed policies all around us today in all walks of life, the successes are in the minority. Why? Grandiose ideas mixed with optimism and I dare say a little hubris. We can see the mistakes of the past clearly. But those made today are always challenged by what is called the 'kill-joys' of life, the unadventurous knocking all the spontaneous actions of youth and optimism, yet some of those people will go on to succeed in 'unforseen' ways.

 

The future as seen from 1930 on must have been one filled with optimism and hope, tinged I am sure, with an underlying suspicion of what might happen with Germany as they were far from being idle after 1918. Were they optimists - or grasping at straws? We know now, but did they know back then.

 

And their optimism was not confined to that period in time as can be seen in the films made during the sixties such as

and Broad Waterways. There would almost certainly have been many who would have seen folly in pushing such ventures, but at the time it was their bread and butter on the table - wouldn't you try and protect yours as much as you could? Transport was changing, their attempts were to be part of that change.

[Chertsey]

Laurence, Alnwick, Tuscon - I always understood that GUCC survived the advent of the railways better than most (after all, it was still going fairly strong into the thirties when most others were on their knees or already abandoned) and what really saw it off was the war and the expansion of road transport in the aftermath.

 

Anyway, no one is suggesting that a policy decision was made to name the boats after railway stations. It is perfectly plausible that the decision was to name them after towns and later, at a lower level, a railway source was used as inspiration.

 

What fascinates me is what was behind the decison to massively expand the fleet like this. Would it have worked if it hadn't been for the war? Would all the boats have gone into service and been profitable? Was it justified optimism, desperation or sheer hubris? Another thing we will never know for certain but by speculating together and pooling our knowledge may come to have a better idea about.

[NB Alnwick]

Makes you wonder what possessed them to make such a large order of freight carrying boats if as you state the railways had by then monopolised the shipment of goods. I think in hindsight you are exactly right but don't believe this was the case when this orders were being planned 1934? Well before the square deal campaign. I am sure the writing was on the wall and this was probably a last fling at trying to promote the canals through amalgamation and modernising the fleet, this still doesn't tell me why they would opt for rail related names (still key competitors) as opposed say to names where individual managers were born or other random connections around place names.

 

What I find really intriguing is the massive investment that was made in the Grand Union Canal during the 1930s - widening, new wide locks, mile upon mile of new concrete piling etc. and of course there was massive investment in the carrying fleet not to mention new lorries, cranes and handling equipment. I have not studied the reasons for this but I suspect there was some financial help, possibly from the Government as a sort of job-creation scheme to ease the unemployment which had caused so much poverty and unrest between the wars. It would be interesting to know how it was all funded?

 

Railway owned canals did not receive the same level of investment despite the fact that the 1930s were very prosperous years for the railway companies.

 

The other interesting anomaly about the widening of the GU was that on reaching Birmingham with its narrow locks - there was nowhere to go . . .